PoE is stacked against the solo player

Lets make sure we keep having a decent number of people "explaining" why solo play is fine as is, because the ridiculousness of the points they make just strengthen the idea that there is a problem.


One idea i had for maps was to be able to select the number of portals that you open.
The map gains increased item rarity for every portal that is not created.
I'd stay away from the idea of quantity or running one map multiple times as a solo player (which is basically just quantity ) due to EXP, recipes, wisdom scroll obliteration, etc.

It doesn't help with non-maps, but it's a nice solution for endgame (which is where most of the people that care about solo/party disparity are likely to be playing).

Well, I still didn't read one convincing argument that I should play in party instead of solo. And I absolutely don't see why the hell would I get a rarity/quantiy bonus while soloing a map, it just goes against any logic since these bonuses do exist for party play. Maybe these ones should be tuned a bit (actually they already were) but giving the same kind of bonus to solo and party play is just ridiculous.

"

Dawmz a écrit :

Well, I still didn't read one convincing argument that I should play in party instead of solo.

Wrong. You havent read a convincing argument that makes you WANT to play in a party.
Should and want are not the same thing. In theory everybody should play with a party because it's flat out better.

"

And I absolutely don't see why the hell would I get a rarity/quantiy bonus while soloing a map, it just goes against any logic since there is actually those bonuses for party play.

I specifically said no quantity.
Also, it's perfectly logical. Solo players spend 6x as much on rolling maps as a proper mapping group. People hosting public maps will charge a fee on maps that actually require proper rolling in order to make up for the lack of a proper mapping group being available at the time.
It's illogical that parties have the bonuses, because it goes against risk:reward.

"

Maybe these ones should be tuned a bit (actually they already were) but giving the same kind of bonus to solo and party play is just ridiculous.

Yes, rewarding a substantially more expensive and dangerous playstyle that also takes longer to make progress is ridiculous. Of course.

You know exactly why party adds rarity. It used to be quantity only (and still, the loot/player in party was not as good as solo) but there was just too much stuff dropping in full party play. Hence the shift towards rarity.
Now if you add rarity to solo play, we're back to square one, except the quantity bonus for party play is now so small compared to the players number that everyone will play solo.

Then you're spending too much currency to get a perfect map roll. I solo a lot of maps and I don't spend 6x the currency I would spend if I was making one for a party. That's a pretty exaggerated argument.

"

mark1030 a écrit :

Then you're spending too much currency to get a perfect map roll. I solo a lot of maps and I don't spend 6x the currency I would spend if I was making one for a party. That's a pretty exaggerated argument.

This post makes no sense. You used a sample size of 1 and not even using the example i gave of a proper mapping group. It has nothing to do with spending too much currency going for "perfect map rolls" whatsoever.

With a proper mapping group, all 6 members roll maps. This means that each of them overall spends 1/6 of what a solo player would spend because a map only needs to be rolled once for all 6 players to enter it. And like i already said, people hosting public maps that require proper rolling will charge a fee to make up for this.

The party rarity bonus should honestly be reduced per difficulty and get down to 0% at merciless. You need to make up for the heavier drop splitting when progressing, but if you want the extra drops in an endgame party you should have to synergize with an MFer or hybrid MFer.

I'm not going to respond to Dawmz previous post for obvious reasons, especially since all of the points i made were skirted around and not actually addressed.

"

Dawmz a écrit :

Well, I still didn't read one convincing argument that I should play in party instead of solo.

Your IIQ/IIR is?
Your survivability is decent/poor?
Your clear speed is decent/poor?
Your currency amount is increasing/decreasing?

Main parameters of why group play is better in most cases, and I don't mean in 51%, or anywhere near that.

"

tinko92 a écrit :

"

Dawmz a écrit :

Well, I still didn't read one convincing argument that I should play in party instead of solo.

Your IIQ/IIR is?
Your survivability is decent/poor?
Your clear speed is decent/poor?
Your currency amount is increasing/decreasing?

Main parameters of why group play is better in most cases, and I don't mean in 51%, or anywhere near that.

1. Usually around 20/100 (and thus better than any group without a dedicated culler, do the math.)
2. Decent.
3. Decent.
4. Increasing.

What now? x)

Tbh I don't see points to address.
Yes, party play in organized parties is mathematically better. It's less dangerous, better average drops, cheaper to get to high maps, whatever you want. Nobody denied that, that's not only a fact, but also a will by GGG ; they stated in the past that they want the players to be encouraged to party.
The question is : is it realistically possible to solo in the game when you don't want to deal with the hassle to manage a party, when you want to play at random hours, with lots of breaks, ... The answer to that used to be no for the endgame, when map rolling was insanely expensive, maps drops less common, maps smaller, ect.. We're far beyond that and it's now not only possible, but also enjoyable to play solo in poe and even level at least until lvl 85. Maybe solo play is really boring / unfair past this point but honestly, does it really matter ? And even if it's true, does this mean that "poe is stacked against the solo player" ? I don't think so.
So yeah, for my personal case, solo play flexibility and freedom to do whatever I want whenever I want outweighs party play mathematical advantages in this version of the game.

"

Your IIQ/IIR is?
Your survivability is decent/poor?
Your clear speed is decent/poor?
Your currency amount is increasing/decreasing?

My IIQ/IIR is 0/100 for rares and bosses, Im culling obviously.
Survivability and clear speed are insanely good but that has a lot more to do with the build than anything else
My currency is largely increasing. I was totally broke on invasion before the 2 week race started (played the first week invasion then had to stop poe for a while), since then I levelled 3 chars to 70 and up, bought some uniques (searing touch, carcass jack), a lot of rares and have something like 15ex in my stash.

Some people finding it reasonable to solo while admitting that there is massive imbalance = no problem?

That's not how game design works. I'd get fired for having a mindset like that, because it's not good for the game. It doesn't matter how you feel. It matters what's good for the game in the long run. Making the largest number of players possible feel like their choice to either group or party did not hinder them is the goal, and that goal is possible without making the game easymode.

When i was talking about not addressing points, its because you were talking in a way that made it sound like you were denying that there was a massive imbalance between solo and party.

I have a feeling that a very specific feature that will benefit parties but benefit solo players much more is going to be coming in the future.

A lot of people on this forum also seem to have issues with people that do not think like them. They constantly tell people that they are wrong for caring about other players having a massive advantage because their preferences line up with GGGs imbalanced mechanics. One doesn't get to tell people that their emotions are incorrect in this situation.

Also, ladders. I love how the fact that this is a competitive game gets thrown out the window when discussing massive imbalances most of the time.